+LightHouseSeekers Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Enquirying minds want to know: Cache Permanence When you report a cache on the Geocaching.com web site, geocachers should (and will) expect the cache to be there for a realistic and extended period of time. Therefore, caches that have the goal to move ("traveling caches"), or temporary caches (caches hidden for less than 3 months or for events) most likely will not be published. If you wish to hide caches for an event, bring printouts to the event and hand them out there. We realize that it is possible that a planned long-term cache occasionally becomes finite because of concerns with the environment, missing or plundered caches, or the owner’s decision to remove the cache for other valid reasons. Please do your best to research fully, hide wisely, and maintain properly for a long cache life. Quote Link to comment
+tozainamboku Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Interesting how the anti power trail bunch want to read this as having to do with power trails. For now it looks more like a permission issue with attaching items to power company infrastructure than anything having to do with the number of caches. I tend to go with the homeland security theory. The transmission lines from Hoover dam to Southern California are critical infrastructure. The power company is probably not interested in trying to figure out if the person stopping at each tower is there looking for a geocache or if they have more nefarious plans. Move the caches away from the towers and you don't have this problem. Quote Link to comment
+TheAlabamaRambler Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Yes, does this mean we still have an unannounced world-wide free-for-all on roadside micro power trails despite "please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can"? Well, except for NE Ohio. I was just reading their local forum today, and they're all like flabergasted that the Trail of the Gods even existed, and think they'd never get something like that published there, and are citing examples of all the times when the Power Trail saturation hammer was dropped down on them. Keep in mind that the area Reviewer was part of that project. I expect that had a lot to do with it getting listed! Quote Link to comment
+modnar24 Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 It seems that the trail of fears is still intact. I think this had to do with California power towers. Maybe they have different use rules then we're used to here in Nevada. You've got one weekend to make it out and find these. Cleanup is happening on the 23rd and 24th. M24 Quote Link to comment
sabrefan7 Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Could not agree more,will this get me another warning from the person who put all that garbage in the desert? Quote Link to comment
+Castle Mischief Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Interesting how the anti power trail bunch want to read this as having to do with power trails. For now it looks more like a permission issue with attaching items to power company infrastructure than anything having to do with the number of caches. More accurately, a permission issue... X500. A permission issue OF THE GODS! So yes it is a permission issue, but one that doesn't really ping on the radar until you add the power trail element. The two facets are inseparable from each other. Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Yes, does this mean we still have an unannounced world-wide free-for-all on roadside micro power trails despite "please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can"? Well, except for NE Ohio. I was just reading their local forum today, and they're all like flabergasted that the Trail of the Gods even existed, and think they'd never get something like that published there, and are citing examples of all the times when the Power Trail saturation hammer was dropped down on them. Keep in mind that the area Reviewer was part of that project. I expect that had a lot to do with it getting listed! I actually knew that. I just didn't bring it up. Yet. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Interesting how the anti power trail bunch want to read this as having to do with power trails. Interesting, indeed. Who are the "anti power trail bunch" you are referring to? I happen to think power trails, placed solely for the purpose of increasing ones find count, are pretty lame. Yet, I haven't made any such speculation. Got a link? Quote Link to comment
+Lil Devil Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 It seems that the trail of fears is still intact. I think this had to do with California power Most of the Trail of Fears were NOT on the towers, but rather under a pile of rocks. I'll bet the few that were on towers have been or will be moved in order to keep that section alive. Quote Link to comment
+Coach Steve Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Interesting how the anti power trail bunch want to read this as having to do with power trails. For now it looks more like a permission issue with attaching items to power company infrastructure than anything having to do with the number of caches. I tend to go with the homeland security theory. The transmission lines from Hoover dam to Southern California are critical infrastructure. The power company is probably not interested in trying to figure out if the person stopping at each tower is there looking for a geocache or if they have more nefarious plans. Move the caches away from the towers and you don't have this problem. Having been there, and knowing the folks who put this trail out, I agree with the security issue. It seems that someone (who sleeps with a night light) got concerned that too many people were using the roads and visiting the towers, and contacted the power company and the BLM. BTW, you did not have to drive off-road anywhere on the trail. The maintenance roads went right to every tower. It's really too bad. It was a surreal experience doing that many caches (421) in one day. It got to be rather tedious, but the company was good and we actually smiled a lot. I actually think Glenn Beck mentioned the Trail of the Gods as a liberal plot to destroy American society, so his minions took appropriate action. Quote Link to comment
+deercreekth Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 I'd love to hear the real story, but I'm unwilling to hold my breath. I don't think you're going to hear the real story because of what it will mean. ( <-- The conspiracy theorist part of me.) Think about it. First, the power trail guideline is completely thrown out the window. No requirement for making the caches a multi considering the close proximity, similarity, and ownership. Second, let's place it on major infrastructure with questionable permission assumptions and no questions asked. Let some other "insiders" break a record or two. Then, let's archive the vast majority of the individual caches claiming unforeseen circumstances so wrists don't get slapped for placing temporary caches. Sure. Pretty elaborate undertaking simply to forge an unbreakable record. Still... I'm just wondering how this will bode for the power trail guideline that was thrown out the window that wasn't really thrown out the window because the guidelines still say "please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can". Many a power trail has been placed during this confusing period in the past year; rural Maine, rural Illinois, near New Orleans, Ontario Canada, Spain, Denmark and Sweden. Those are just off the top of my head. Do you happen to know where the power trail in rural Illinois is? Quote Link to comment
+Sioneva Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 (edited) Interesting how the anti power trail bunch want to read this as having to do with power trails. For now it looks more like a permission issue with attaching items to power company infrastructure than anything having to do with the number of caches. I tend to go with the homeland security theory. The transmission lines from Hoover dam to Southern California are critical infrastructure. The power company is probably not interested in trying to figure out if the person stopping at each tower is there looking for a geocache or if they have more nefarious plans. Move the caches away from the towers and you don't have this problem. Having been there, and knowing the folks who put this trail out, I agree with the security issue. It seems that someone (who sleeps with a night light) got concerned that too many people were using the roads and visiting the towers, and contacted the power company and the BLM. BTW, you did not have to drive off-road anywhere on the trail. The maintenance roads went right to every tower. It's really too bad. It was a surreal experience doing that many caches (421) in one day. It got to be rather tedious, but the company was good and we actually smiled a lot. I actually think Glenn Beck mentioned the Trail of the Gods as a liberal plot to destroy American society, so his minions took appropriate action. <quickly editing out end-of-the-day, stress related overreaction.> Apologies! Edited April 14, 2010 by Sioneva Quote Link to comment
+chasclifton Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 I'm a newbie to the sport, but I have been reading this thread and the previous one, and I just don't get it. Putting out 500 magnetic containers on power towers (and, presumably, getting a location reading on each one) sounds *really* boring. Driving up and stamping the log of each cache sounds almost as boring. It's like hanging doors on Chevrolets all day in a factory. (Apologies to any UAW members reading.) Well, I got two (2) caches today. Each one required a little bit of cross-country walking, maybe a quarter mile each way. The red-winged blackbirds were singing in the marsh, and I photographed the view of Pikes Peak for one cache's gallery. I look forward to more leisurely caching. Quote Link to comment
+Lil Devil Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 That's the neat thing about geocaching -- you can play it however you want. If you just want to find one cache in a local park, you can. If you want to spend all day driving around town and find 50 caches, you can. If you want to go for a 10 mile hike and just find one or two caches, you can. If you want to spend 24 hours straight driving through the desert finding as many caches as possible, you can. On different days, I might want to do any one of those methods, or others. Different people can play different ways, and each can be happy. No need to put each other down for playing the game our own way. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 Driving up and stamping the log of (500 P&G caches) sounds boring. To me, it would be about as exciting as watching paint dry. But there are folks who would get all a twitter at the idea. As long as they are enjoying themselves, that's all that matters. (Besides, the process adds to the number of people you can giggle at later) Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 I'd love to hear the real story, but I'm unwilling to hold my breath. I don't think you're going to hear the real story because of what it will mean. ( <-- The conspiracy theorist part of me.) Think about it. First, the power trail guideline is completely thrown out the window. No requirement for making the caches a multi considering the close proximity, similarity, and ownership. Second, let's place it on major infrastructure with questionable permission assumptions and no questions asked. Let some other "insiders" break a record or two. Then, let's archive the vast majority of the individual caches claiming unforeseen circumstances so wrists don't get slapped for placing temporary caches. Sure. Pretty elaborate undertaking simply to forge an unbreakable record. Still... I'm just wondering how this will bode for the power trail guideline that was thrown out the window that wasn't really thrown out the window because the guidelines still say "please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can". Many a power trail has been placed during this confusing period in the past year; rural Maine, rural Illinois, near New Orleans, Ontario Canada, Spain, Denmark and Sweden. Those are just off the top of my head. Do you happen to know where the power trail in rural Illinois is? It'll take a while, but I'll get back to you. Have to finish my State Income tax, you know. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted April 14, 2010 Share Posted April 14, 2010 (edited) I'm a newbie to the sport, but I have been reading this thread and the previous one, and I just don't get it. Putting out 500 magnetic containers on power towers (and, presumably, getting a location reading on each one) sounds *really* boring. Driving up and stamping the log of each cache sounds almost as boring. It's like hanging doors on Chevrolets all day in a factory. (Apologies to any UAW members reading.) Then you probably wouldn't do it, would you? I've done some (moderate) "power caching", and I've done some long rural or even mountainous hikes for one or a few caches. I enjoyed each in its own way. Edited April 15, 2010 by knowschad Quote Link to comment
+WRITE SHOP ROBERT Posted April 14, 2010 Author Share Posted April 14, 2010 I'm a newbie to the sport, but I have been reading this thread and the previous one, and I just don't get it. Putting out 500 magnetic containers on power towers (and, presumably, getting a location reading on each one) sounds *really* boring. Driving up and stamping the log of each cache sounds almost as boring. It's like hanging doors on Chevrolets all day in a factory. (Apologies to any UAW members reading.) Well, I got two (2) caches today. Each one required a little bit of cross-country walking, maybe a quarter mile each way. The red-winged blackbirds were singing in the marsh, and I photographed the view of Pikes Peak for one cache's gallery. I look forward to more leisurely caching. If you read the logs of the people who found these, you'll see that they had a BLAST. There are many ways to play, and after so many years of relaxed Caching, perhaps it would be fun to take on a challenge. Here are links to the two ends, so you can see that there ARE ways to have fun on a run like that too. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...29-dd7319559162 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...e7-5bfc006825fb Quote Link to comment
+humboldt flier Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 That's the neat thing about geocaching -- you can play it however you want. If you just want to find one cache in a local park, you can. If you want to spend all day driving around town and find 50 caches, you can. If you want to go for a 10 mile hike and just find one or two caches, you can. If you want to spend 24 hours straight driving through the desert finding as many caches as possible, you can. On different days, I might want to do any one of those methods, or others. Different people can play different ways, and each can be happy. No need to put each other down for playing the game our own way. 10 - 4 to all of the above. Quote Link to comment
+humboldt flier Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 (edited) Given that there are frequent off road vehicle races through this area. Within the past month there was a race through the area with 180 vehicles in the competition. I am puzzled by the argument relating to harming the environment. Just saying Edited April 15, 2010 by humboldt flier Quote Link to comment
+WRITE SHOP ROBERT Posted April 15, 2010 Author Share Posted April 15, 2010 Given that there are frequent multi hundred off road vehicle races through this area I am most puzzled by the weak argument relating to harming the environment. Just saying I think it's been established that the problem came out of the lack of permission to attach the Caches to the towers. Quote Link to comment
+humboldt flier Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Given that there are frequent multi hundred off road vehicle races through this area I am most puzzled by the weak argument relating to harming the environment. Just saying I think it's been established that the problem came out of the lack of permission to attach the Caches to the towers. That is indeed true, however, there are still posts chatting about environmental harm. No intention of hi-jackiing the thread. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Given that there are frequent multi hundred off road vehicle races through this area I am most puzzled by the weak argument relating to harming the environment. Just saying I think it's been established that the problem came out of the lack of permission to attach the Caches to the towers. That is indeed true, however, there are still posts chatting about environmental harm. No intention of hi-jackiing the thread. The threads on the caches that mention archival do refer to environmental concerns, but that's very likely just a smoke screen, I suspect. Quote Link to comment
+simpjkee Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Chiming in to say that it would be really cool of 'NGA' to jump in and help clear up what the issue was. ie. What is meant by 'undue attention'? Was 'increased traffic' not expected before the caches were placed?, Was the power company informed?, Did the power company play a role in the archival? etc, etc, etc. I understand that 'NGA' is not required to explain the archival to us, but it would be cool if they did. I've always appreciated it when cachers voluntarily give specific reasons for cache archival to help improve cache placements in the future. Feel free to check my archived caches to see a full write up on the reasons for archival if you want an example of what I mean. Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Chiming in to say that it would be really cool of 'NGA' to jump in and help clear up what the issue was. ie. What is meant by 'undue attention'? Was 'increased traffic' not expected before the caches were placed?, Was the power company informed?, Did the power company play a role in the archival? etc, etc, etc. I understand that 'NGA' is not required to explain the archival to us, but it would be cool if they did. I've always appreciated it when cachers voluntarily give specific reasons for cache archival to help improve cache placements in the future. Feel free to check my archived caches to see a full write up on the reasons for archival if you want an example of what I mean. It would be nice to know what the problems were so future endeavors of this type can avoid a repeat of the error. However, I doubt we willk ever get the whole story. And no. I will not be attempting to hide or find such a trail. I would just like to see whoever does this next, and you know someone will, not get caching into hot water with any land owners/managers. Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 However, I doubt we will ever get the whole story. Agreed. If the owners feel compelled to put of a smoke screen in their archival notes, I can't imagine they'll decide to suddenly choose honesty just to satisfy our curiosity. Quote Link to comment
+atmospherium Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 I doubt if there was any local "whistle blower" behind this. It was all those magnets sucking the power out of the towers. They noticed the drain and traced it back. Your next electrical bill is gonna be sky high. Now you know who to blame. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 However, I doubt we will ever get the whole story. Agreed. If the owners feel compelled to put of a smoke screen in their archival notes, I can't imagine they'll decide to suddenly choose honesty just to satisfy our curiosity. I don't know about that. Moose Mob was part of the group that hid these caches, right? Also a reviewer for the area. And a forum poster. I'd think that he'd be willing and able to fill us in... right? Quote Link to comment
+WRITE SHOP ROBERT Posted April 15, 2010 Author Share Posted April 15, 2010 However, I doubt we will ever get the whole story. Agreed. If the owners feel compelled to put of a smoke screen in their archival notes, I can't imagine they'll decide to suddenly choose honesty just to satisfy our curiosity. I don't think there is a smoke screen, just that they were quoting someone who required the archival. Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 However, I doubt we will ever get the whole story. Agreed. If the owners feel compelled to put of a smoke screen in their archival notes, I can't imagine they'll decide to suddenly choose honesty just to satisfy our curiosity. I don't know about that. Moose Mob was part of the group that hid these caches, right? Also a reviewer for the area. And a forum poster. I'd think that he'd be willing and able to fill us in... right? You forgot moderator of this forum. And the person who was posting as NGA. I'm sure a fill-in is coming. Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 I'd love to hear the real story, but I'm unwilling to hold my breath. I don't think you're going to hear the real story because of what it will mean. ( <-- The conspiracy theorist part of me.) Think about it. First, the power trail guideline is completely thrown out the window. No requirement for making the caches a multi considering the close proximity, similarity, and ownership. Second, let's place it on major infrastructure with questionable permission assumptions and no questions asked. Let some other "insiders" break a record or two. Then, let's archive the vast majority of the individual caches claiming unforeseen circumstances so wrists don't get slapped for placing temporary caches. Sure. Pretty elaborate undertaking simply to forge an unbreakable record. Still... I'm just wondering how this will bode for the power trail guideline that was thrown out the window that wasn't really thrown out the window because the guidelines still say "please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can". Many a power trail has been placed during this confusing period in the past year; rural Maine, rural Illinois, near New Orleans, Ontario Canada, Spain, Denmark and Sweden. Those are just off the top of my head. Do you happen to know where the power trail in rural Illinois is? I'm back. South of Peoria and Bloomington. By username MutherandSun. I only have Geocaching.com Google Maps at my disposal right now, so I can't zoom out enough. But I'm rather certain she spelled the word MUTHER along rural roads. That user has 900 hides, and I'm sure I've heard of a bike trail power trail in Illinois by them as well. Quote Link to comment
knowschad Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 However, I doubt we will ever get the whole story. Agreed. If the owners feel compelled to put of a smoke screen in their archival notes, I can't imagine they'll decide to suddenly choose honesty just to satisfy our curiosity. I don't know about that. Moose Mob was part of the group that hid these caches, right? Also a reviewer for the area. And a forum poster. I'd think that he'd be willing and able to fill us in... right? You forgot moderator of this forum. And the person who was posting as NGA. I'm sure a fill-in is coming. I didn't forget that. Just chose to let someone else mention it. Thanks! Quote Link to comment
Clan Riffster Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 I don't think there is a smoke screen, just that they were quoting someone who required the archival. So the person they were quoting was blowing smoke? Quote Link to comment
+WRITE SHOP ROBERT Posted April 15, 2010 Author Share Posted April 15, 2010 I don't think there is a smoke screen, just that they were quoting someone who required the archival. So the person they were quoting was blowing smoke? I'd guess the person they were quoting just writes things in that vague sort of way that is typical of corporate middle management. Quote Link to comment
+dfx Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 it just occured to me, i wonder how much PO's the reviewers are who published all those hundreds of caches, just to see them being archived just a few weeks later Quote Link to comment
+DeRock & The Psychic Cacher Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 (edited) it just occured to me, i wonder how much PO's the reviewers are who published all those hundreds of caches, just to see them being archived just a few weeks later I don't know about PO'ed but I certainly would be looking at the next power trail from this crew with a jaded eye. It's one thing to lose a cache or two to issues beyond your control. But to lose 100's is inexcusable. No matter what the cause it reeks of poor planning. Or maybe they were just designed to last a few weeks. From what I have heard we still haven't heard the real reason behind the mass archival. Don't know what it is but apparently the reasons speculated on so far are not correct. On the Muther and Son series in central Illinios - had a great time over 3 days grabbing many of these and a few more a month or so ago. Set a personal one day record for myself and my caching partners did too. Nothing earth shattering compared to anybody else. But I can say we had lots of fun. Deane AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI Edit to add a link to the profile of the cache hider of the central Illinois power trail series: MutherAndSon. Just check their bookmark lists for each series. Edited April 15, 2010 by DeRock & The Psychic Cacher Quote Link to comment
GOF and Bacall Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 it just occured to me, i wonder how much PO's the reviewers are who published all those hundreds of caches, just to see them being archived just a few weeks later Hmmn? Wasn't the reviewer involved in hiding the trail? Quote Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 I wonder how it bodes for the no precedence guideline. Interesting. How so? Yes, does this mean we still have an unannounced world-wide free-for-all on roadside micro power trails despite "please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can"? Well, except for NE Ohio. I was just reading their local forum today, and they're all like flabergasted that the Trail of the Gods even existed, and think they'd never get something like that published there, and are citing examples of all the times when the Power Trail saturation hammer was dropped down on them. It wasn't unnounced then and certainly isn't now. Quote Link to comment
+DeRock & The Psychic Cacher Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 it just occured to me, i wonder how much PO's the reviewers are who published all those hundreds of caches, just to see them being archived just a few weeks later Hmmn? Wasn't the reviewer involved in hiding the trail? Although I haven't spoken to the reviewer in question, apparently not. It would be nice to hear in the public forum from all involved directly with hiding/publishing this series. Speculation and innuendo, unless that is the goal, doesn't become this series. Deane AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI Quote Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Could not agree more,will this get me another warning from the person who put all that garbage in the desert? You know, if you actually used those as 'warnings', you could modify your behavior so you didn't get future ones. (Go Sabres!) Quote Link to comment
+NeecesandNephews Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 (edited) I'd love to hear the real story, but I'm unwilling to hold my breath. I don't think you're going to hear the real story because of what it will mean. ( <-- The conspiracy theorist part of me.) Think about it. First, the power trail guideline is completely thrown out the window. No requirement for making the caches a multi considering the close proximity, similarity, and ownership. Second, let's place it on major infrastructure with questionable permission assumptions and no questions asked. Let some other "insiders" break a record or two. Then, let's archive the vast majority of the individual caches claiming unforeseen circumstances so wrists don't get slapped for placing temporary caches. Sure. Pretty elaborate undertaking simply to forge an unbreakable record. Still... I am going to put on my tin foil hat and agree with this post. This whole deal reeks. I would love to hear from someone representing NGA now. Interesting how the anti power trail bunch want to read this as having to do with power trails. For now it looks more like a permission issue with attaching items to power company infrastructure than anything having to do with the number of caches. Imagine that!!! The "pro rules" puritans must be laughing with glee!! I can't even begin to imagine the repercussions this might have. I mean, just imagine" what if" (I do not know what happened but am waiting to find out) after all the angst over where we are and aren't allowed to cache, how our actions reflect on the sport/hobby, in what is probably one of the most publicized placements of caches since Dave Ulmer hid the first one, this turns out to be a "permission" issue. And with a Reviewer involved in the placement!!! Isn't it ironic?? Those darn "pesky" Guidelines. This has the potential to be the biggest black eye the "sport/hobby" ever received. But I am just speculating. I am sure that is not what actually happened. Edited April 15, 2010 by NeecesandNephews Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 (edited) Could not agree more,will this get me another warning from the person who put all that garbage in the desert? You know, if you actually used those as 'warnings', you could modify your behavior so you didn't get future ones. (Go Sabres!) I'm sure his point is that the moderator he received the warning from is the mastermind, and member of the "placement team" of the power trail. Would he have received a warning if he expressed his opinion of live hamsters in caches? The world may never know. I agree, Go Sabres. Edited April 15, 2010 by TheWhiteUrkel Quote Link to comment
+humboldt flier Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Could not agree more,will this get me another warning from the person who put all that garbage in the desert? You know, if you actually used those as 'warnings', you could modify your behavior so you didn't get future ones. (Go Sabres!) I'm sure his point is that the moderator he received the warning from is the mastermind, and member of the "placement team" of the power trail. Would he have received a warning if he expressed his opinion of live hamsters in caches? The world may never know. I agree, Go Sabres. > Go Habs. < I posted a new thread last night suggesting a repository where TOTG veterans could post stories and photos of the Mojave Desert experience. Then with tongue in cheek suggested a shirt design which would instantly serve notice to the public at large that the wearers had a particular affliction and might be contagious. Post was killed in short order. My Bad, My Bad I go to corner and repent. Quote Link to comment
+Sioneva Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Slow down! I'm having trouble keeping up with what I should be properly annoyed about!! Because someone placed a power trail? Because they were mostly micros? Because it was used to set an unofficial record? Because it was used to set an official record? Because someone whined to the BLM and it was archived? Because a reviewer was involved in placing the caches? Because a reviewer was involved in approving the caches? Because it didn't last very long before someone whined to the BLM and it was archived? Honestly.. from my vantage point, the NGA is getting pummeled from all sides, rather unjustly. The caches are archived, no, it's not "the biggest black eye ever", so just let it go! Personally, I empathize with the people who did all the work, and all for nothing, now. They've got my sympathy! Quote Link to comment
+bigeddy Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 What a fiasco. The hubris to construct a colossal cache series without bothering to get buy-in from the land agencies and tower owners is... unfortunate. That Groundspeak published the "power trail" and then took it down in 5 weeks is a black eye on the game. I trust the instigators are barred from pulling a stunt like this again. Of course, there's nothing inherently wrong with activities involving time and check-in points. Orienteering events and off-road rallies are two examples of roughly similar activities to a power-cache series. However, any resemblance between geocaching and speeding as fast as one dare from one transmission tower to the next--repeat hundreds of times--is incidental. People are free to pursue this type of activity but I don't think it should be done under the name of geocaching. Quote Link to comment
+humboldt flier Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 (edited) it just occured to me, i wonder how much PO's the reviewers are who published all those hundreds of caches, just to see them being archived just a few weeks later Indeed, to see that volume of work go into the toilet and down the chute has to be a hide chapper. One poster on the NGA forum has suggested that their thread be re named " Massacre Of The Gods " Some folks on the So. Cal. Forum have a markedly different view of the TOTG debacle. Some interesting reads. Edited April 15, 2010 by humboldt flier Quote Link to comment
+Sioneva Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 What a fiasco. The hubris to construct a colossal cache series without bothering to get buy-in from the land agencies and tower owners is... unfortunate. That Groundspeak published the "power trail" and then took it down in 5 weeks is a black eye on the game. I trust the instigators are barred from pulling a stunt like this again. Of course, there's nothing inherently wrong with activities involving time and check-in points. Orienteering events and off-road rallies are two examples of roughly similar activities to a power-cache series. However, any resemblance between geocaching and speeding as fast as one dare from one transmission tower to the next--repeat hundreds of times--is incidental. People are free to pursue this type of activity but I don't think it should be done under the name of geocaching. Oh, yeah. Thanks for reminding me I missed one of the reasons I should be annoyed... Because people dared to enjoy themselves while doing the power trail? Quote Link to comment
+Team Black-Cat Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Slow down! I'm having trouble keeping up with what I should be properly annoyed about!! Why must you be properly annoyed? Can't you be happy being just generally annoyed? <Bowing to the bow and hiding> Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 it just occured to me, i wonder how much PO's the reviewers are who published all those hundreds of caches, just to see them being archived just a few weeks later Indeed, to see that volume of work go into the toilet and down the chute has to be a hide chapper. One poster on the NGA forum has suggested that their thread be re named " Massacre Of The Gods " Some folks on the So. Cal. Forum have a markedly different view of the TOTG debacle. Some interesting reads. You must be referring to the SoCal 4x4 geocachers? Because Socalgeocachers.com hasn't had a new post since Mid-March. What's markedly different? Seems even more negative about the Trail of the Gods than this thread. Quote Link to comment
+sbell111 Posted April 15, 2010 Share Posted April 15, 2010 Could not agree more,will this get me another warning from the person who put all that garbage in the desert? You know, if you actually used those as 'warnings', you could modify your behavior so you didn't get future ones. (Go Sabres!) I'm sure his point is that the moderator he received the warning from is the mastermind, and member of the "placement team" of the power trail. Would he have received a warning if he expressed his opinion of live hamsters in caches? The world may never know. I agree, Go Sabres. I think that you would agree that, based solely on the post of his that you quoted, that he could avoid warnings by more fully considering his posts prior to pushing the 'add reply' button. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.